Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

kalkis-research.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 195 posts

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#11

Post by sreeni_ananth »

BillFranklin wrote: post #4

The writer attacks impressions over clicks as more expensive and less worthwhile, but misses entirely that advertising isn't about making you click (few really click), it's about awareness. The writer also notes that Google is putting ads on lower quality websites, but forgets that their search ads comprise the lions share of their ad revenue. Google.com isn't becoming a lower quality website.

It's not just awareness but also constant reminders to buy things that have been left on your shopping cart. One can see such contents not only on sidebars of websites, but also on apps like TrueCaller which are mixing ads more effectively as part of their content.

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#13

Post by jasode »

BillFranklin wrote: post #4

The writer attacks impressions over clicks as more expensive and less worthwhile, but misses entirely that advertising isn't about making you click (few really click), it's about awareness. The writer also notes that Google is putting ads on lower quality websites, but forgets that their search ads comprise the lions share of their ad revenue. Google.com isn't becoming a lower quality website.

>", it's about awareness."

I'm curious if this is actually statistically true specifically in regards to google ads which has active user exploration as opposed to tv/radio/magazines which has passive consumption.

To me, the "awareness ads" are campaigns typically created by CocaCola/Pepsi, beer, DeBeers diamonds-are-forever, Viagra-you-should-asky-your-doctor-about-it. The ads typically feature vague and generic "lifestyle" vignettes and will not have a "call toll-free 1-800 to order" at the end. Like you said, it's all about brand awareness. It's also the type of ads that get aired during the NFL SuperBowl.

But many google ads are highly contextual with the active web surfer already and partially in a "sales funnel". Examples would be a search for "plumber" or "computer RAM" which means the customer is primed to buy something now. I read previously that the vast majority of google ad revenue comes from small & medium businesses and not the Fortune 500 giants like CocaCola and Budweiser. Those small & medium business care very much about "click through" rather than just "awareness impressions." (Side note: Looking through the most expensive adwords list[1] seems to bring up business sectors that rely more on click-through-&-buy-now rather than awareness-&-delay-buy-later.)

Hopefully, someone more knowledgeable about these 2 types of ads can confirm which one contributes the most revenue to Google.

[1]http://www.wordstream.com/articles/most-expensive-keywords

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#14

Post by dozzie »

BillFranklin wrote: post #4

The writer attacks impressions over clicks as more expensive and less worthwhile, but misses entirely that advertising isn't about making you click (few really click), it's about awareness. The writer also notes that Google is putting ads on lower quality websites, but forgets that their search ads comprise the lions share of their ad revenue. Google.com isn't becoming a lower quality website.

Marketing is about awareness. A subfield of marketing called advertising is about making people buy the product no matter whether they need it.

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#15

Post by red_admiral »

"Facebook on the other hand, has a better control of who is actually seeing its ads, and will benefit from the turmoil by gaining market share."

Did they pay you to write this?

Google ads in search will always be valuable because you can advertise nail varnish to people who have just searched for "buy nail varnish".

This is also about the millionth post I've read which assumes that companies simply throw money at advertising and don't run any statistics of their own. Simply, if you spend a lot on an ad campaign for a product and your sales don't go up, you notice that and rethink your next campaign. CPM and all that are at best proxy metrics for the thing you really care about, "are our profits/sales up".

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#16

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

raverbashing wrote: post #6

To me this all sounds like: play stupid games, win stupid prices Add an unholy amount of tracking and obtrusiveness to ads, get ad-blockers Have no check for advertisers and ad-publishers, get fraud and malware on the networks (and more ad-blocking) Then get ad-brokerage and arbitrage as posted a couple of days ago, seems like a prime example on how BS jobs flourish (because if there's something even more stupid than…

It's a law of the Internet - anything that can be gamed for profit, will be gamed for profit.

Trad media may be dinosaurs, but they're much harder to game. You can't pretend to improve the return on a double-page glossy ad in a famous glossy magazine by hiring a Cambodian click farm.

I'm wondering if we're going to see a move back to print.

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#17

Post by eva1984 »

"A special case must be made of Facebook, as we believe that their platform is harder to crack, and they have a better ability to track their users, and fight ad fraud."

LOL, this is one of the most blatantly money article I ever read. No facebook data AT ALL, yet author claims Facebook is superior and immune to those problems he mentioned, because apparently he believes.

EDIT: this company, "KALKIS UAB", if you throw to Google search only 4,580 results get returned.

EDIT2: find this article: "Facebook’s Unsuspected Growth Driver: Virtual Reality" https://kalkis-research.com/facebooks-unsuspected-growth-dri...

Maybe Facebook didn't pay them, but authors are Facebook shareholders would be my guess.

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#18

Post by chii »

red_admiral wrote: post #15

"Facebook on the other hand, has a better control of who is actually seeing its ads, and will benefit from the turmoil by gaining market share." Did they pay you to write this? Google ads in search will always be valuable because you can advertise nail varnish to people who have just searched for "buy nail varnish". This is also about the millionth post I've read which assumes that companies simply throw money at adv…

so you're saying facebook couldn't scan the pictures people post up, see that a user's finger is not painted properly, and thus start displaying the appropriate ads?

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#19

Post by have_faith »

chii wrote: post #18
red_admiral wrote: post #15

"Facebook on the other hand, has a better control of who is actually seeing its ads, and will benefit from the turmoil by gaining market share." Did they pay you to write this? Google ads in search will always be valuable because you can advertise nail varnish to people who have just searched for "buy nail varnish". This is also about the millionth post I've read which assumes that companies simply throw money at adv…

so you're saying facebook couldn't scan the pictures people post up, see that a user's finger is not painted properly, and thus start displaying the appropriate ads?

Not only do I not think they could do that currently. I worry about the effect this future form of advertising will have on young people.

Your insecurities analysed and used against you in real time.

Re: Google: End of the Online Advertising Bubble

#20

Post by red_admiral »

chii wrote: post #18
red_admiral wrote: post #15

"Facebook on the other hand, has a better control of who is actually seeing its ads, and will benefit from the turmoil by gaining market share." Did they pay you to write this? Google ads in search will always be valuable because you can advertise nail varnish to people who have just searched for "buy nail varnish". This is also about the millionth post I've read which assumes that companies simply throw money at adv…

so you're saying facebook couldn't scan the pictures people post up, see that a user's finger is not painted properly, and thus start displaying the appropriate ads?

If I walk into a store, the assistant asks "Can I help you?" and I reply "I'm looking for a crimson-coloured nail varnish" and then she says "Sure! We have a new line in this week, can I show you?" then I'm more than happy to let her show me. That's what google search ads feel like.

If I'm sitting in a restaurant having a conversation with a friend and a person from the next table leans over and interrupts to say "I notice your nails aren't painted properly, can I interest you in our new line of nail varnish?" then my first thought will be something like wouldn't it be cool if something horrible and painful happened to this person. Even if I was considering trying a new line of nail varnish. That's what targeted facebook ads feel like.

Post reply on HN